Issue - meetings

Motions

Meeting: 27/11/2019 - County Council (Item 71)

Motions

The Council’s Constitution provides for a maximum of two hours for debate on motions.  At the end of the two hour period, those members who have already indicated their intention to speak on the motion being debated at that time will be allowed to speak, the mover of the motion will be asked to sum-up and the vote will be taken.

 

The time limit for member speeches is three minutes and the time limit for proposing a motion is five minutes.

 

The following motions were received by the closing date of 10am on 19 November 2019: 

 

Motion 848 - Tree planting

Proposed by Cllr Lesley Williams

Seconded by Cllr Graham Morgan

 

This Council passed a motion on 15th May 2019 recognising that there is a climate emergency.


This Council committed to an 80% reduction in the corporate carbon emissions no later than 2030, striving to 100% with carbon offset by the same date. Research now shows that planting billions of trees is the best and cheapest way to tackle climate change.

This Council resolves to request Cabinet to develop a policy of tree planting; with a target of planting 2 trees for each Gloucestershire resident by 2030, if not sooner, and to work with tenant farmers and encourage at least 2 trees per field for most pasture land.


I ask that a progress report is included in the annual Environmental report.

 

Motion 849 – Responsible investment policy

Proposed by Cllr Colin Hay

Seconded by Cllr Rachel Smith

 

This Council notes that:

·         A ‘Climate Emergency’ was declared by Gloucestershire County Council in May 2019, along with five of the six district councils.

·         Burning fossil fuels poses a serious risk to the stability of the climate upon which our well-being and economy depend.

·         Research demonstrates that up to 80% world’s proven fossil fuel reserves will have to remain unburnt if we are to have a reasonable chance of keeping global warming to less than 2 degrees Celsius, the globally agreed target for climate change mitigation.

·         Since 80% of fossil fuels must remain in the ground, the reserves of the fossil fuel industry risk becoming ‘stranded assets’ with little or no value – representing a substantial financial risk for those that invest in them.

 

This Council further notes that:

·         Gloucestershire Pension Fund currently has over £140 million invested in the oil, coal and gas industries – nearly 7 per cent of the total pension investments.

·         To date, over 1,100 institutions representing nearly $11.5 trillion in assets have committed to divest from fossil fuel companies.

·         Over a dozen UK councils have committed to divestment, including Stroud District Council and nearby Oxford City Council.

·         Divesting from fossil-fuel industries is both environmentally and financially responsible, with fossil-free portfolios outperforming non-divested equivalents in recent years.

 

This Council commits to:

·         Review its Investment Strategy and develop and implement a Responsible Investment Policy, which rules out new investments in Fossil fuel companies.

·         Call on Gloucestershire Pension Fund to divest from fossil fuels by requesting its representative on the Pension  ...  view the full agenda text for item 71

Minutes:

Motion 848 - Tree planting

Cllr Lesley Williams, as proposer, and Cllr Graham Morgan, as seconder, indicated that they had accepted the friendly amendments from the Liberal Democrat Group highlighted below.

 

This Council passed a motion on 15th May 2019 recognising that there is a climate emergency.

 

This Council committed to an 80% reduction in the corporate carbon emissions no later than 2030, striving to 100% with carbon offset by the same date. Research now shows that planting billions of trees is the best and cheapest way to tackle climate change.

 

This Council resolves to request Cabinet to develop a policy of tree planting; with a target of planting 2 trees 1 treefor each Gloucestershire resident every year up toby 2030, if not sooner, and to work with tenant farmers and encourage at least 2 trees per field for most pasture land.

 

I ask that a progress report is included in the annual Environmental report.

 

Cllr Williams stated that trees curbed climate change by absorbing large amounts of carbon dioxide and they reduced soil degradation, diminished flood risk and yielded a renewable energy resource.  It was estimated that a worldwide tree planting programme could remove two thirds of carbon dioxide emissions going into the atmosphere as a result of human activity.  She noted that it was tree planting week with local bodies including parish councils committing to a tree planting programme.

 

Cllr Morgan expressed concern that deforestation was not just happening in other parts of the world but also locally.  He said that the Forestry Commission were clearing large areas of the Forest of Dean at a time they should be looking to increase tree coverage.

 

Cllr Paul Hodgkinson, who had put forward the friendly amendment, referred to the Liberal Democrat motion considered at the last meeting.  He said that planting billions of trees across the World was the cheapest and best way to address climate change.  He believed that planting one tree per year for each resident of the county by 2030 was a realistic ambition. 

 

Cllr Nigel Moor proposed and Cllr Mark Hawthorne seconded a motion without notice under procedural rule 11.1.13 of part 4 of the constitution, to refer the subject of the debate to the Cabinet.  He said that he supported the principle of the motion and noted that the Council was already working with Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust and the Woodland Trust to identify sites for tree planting.  Opportunities would be taken to promote biodiversity and tree planting on the County Council estate.  He noted that changes would be proposed to the Gloucestershire Streets’ Manual to encourage more tree planting on new housing sites.  The Climate Change Strategy would be presented to the Cabinet on 20 December 2019.

 

There was a short adjournment to allow Group Leaders to agree how the motion without notice should be dealt with.

 

On reconvening, a member expressed concern that referring the motion to the Cabinet would close down debate.  They said that members would not be given the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71


Meeting: 11/09/2019 - County Council (Item 56)

Motions

The Council’s Constitution provides for a maximum of two hours for debate on motions.  At the end of the two hour period, those members who have already indicated their intention to speak on the motion being debated at that time will be allowed to speak, the mover of the motion will be asked to sum-up and the vote will be taken.

 

The time limit for member speeches is three minutes and the time limit for proposing a motion is five minutes.

 

The following motions were received by the closing date of 10am on 3 September 2019: 

 

Motion 843 – Enabling road safety measures

Proposed by Cllr Klara Sudbury

Seconded by Cllr Eva Ward

 

This Council notes that:

·         road safety and traffic speeds are of significant concern to many residents in Gloucestershire, in both urban and rural areas.

·         elected county councillors have a key role to play, working with local communities, to resolve these concerns, finding effective road safety solutions to help pedestrians, cyclists and all road users.

 

However, this Council further notes that:

·         when County Councillors request measures to reduce traffic speeds, even when offering to put their highways local funds towards it, policy and financial constraints mean they rarely come to fruition.

·         a key obstacle in securing some traffic calming measures is the cost of Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO) and the lengthy processes needed to secure changes such as yellow lines.

 

Therefore this Council resolves to:

a)    Ask Cabinet to review County Council policies relating to traffic calming, including the use of physical design and vehicle activated signage, to aid councillors in securing evidence-based road changes.

b)    Write to the relevant Secretary of State to:

i)     Express our serious concern that national road safety guidelines are too restrictive and ask for the guidance to be reviewed to create a more enabling policy framework.

ii)    Clarify what progress has been made to simplify the TRO process.

c)    Consider increasing the road safety budget for 2020-21 through the budget setting process, which could include a ring fenced budget for each council division. 

d)    Build on existing local road safety initiatives to establish “road safety partnerships” for each of the six districts where there are none, and to formalise the relationship between road safety partnerships and the highways authority and county councillors.

 

Motion 844 – Future proofing public buildings and developments in Gloucestershire

Proposed by Cllr Paul Hodgkinson

Seconded by Cllr Ben Evans

 

This Council notes:

·         That a ‘climate emergency’ was declared by Gloucestershire County Council (GC) in May 2019, along with five of the six district councils.

  • That the County Council is striving to become carbon neutral by 2030 and is identifying measures to deliver an 80 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions across the whole county by the same date.

 

This Council further notes:

·         GCC holds significant sway over the design of county-council-backed public buildings, such as the proposed new secondary school in Leckhampton.

·         GCC has significant influence over developers when disposing of land for development. 

·         In 2006  ...  view the full agenda text for item 56

Minutes:

Motion 843 – Enabling road safety measures

 

Cllr Klara Sudbury proposed and Cllr Eva Ward seconded the motion included on the agenda.

 

Cllr Sudbury noted how important it was for county councillors to be able to secure effective road safety measures for their local communities.  She expressed concern that the traffic regulation order process often blocked the implementation of schemes. This was frustrating for local communities who were best placed to judge on what was needed in their areas. The amount of money spent on road safety in Gloucestershire was just £1.53 per person each year.  She noted that even when she had made funds available through her Highways Local allocation, highway officers had not been cooperative.

 

Cllr Ward advised that road safety was one of the main concerns in local communities.  She said that the public had no idea about the complexity of the traffic regulation order process in implementing the simplest road safety measures.  She noted that it had taken two years in her Stroud Division to go through the approval and implementation process for four vehicle-activated signs.  Communities were often left to set up local campaigns in an effort to manage speeds.  She believed that a county-wide road safety partnership should be established to ensure that there was a consistent approach.

 

A number of members referred to the success of speed awareness campaigns in their own areas.  They acknowledged frustrations with the time that it could take to implement schemes, but believed that there should be more focus on working with local communities to reduce speeds.  They noted that enforcement was an important aspect of traffic regulation orders and there was little point in putting schemes in place if they could not be enforced.

 

A member asked that highways officers be thanked for their efforts in introducing a complex scheme in Moreton-in-Marsh to protect pedestrians, cyclists and children going to school. 

 

Other members expressed frustration at the complexity of the traffic regulation order process and the lack of officer resources available to implement schemes.  Often it was taking years to implement simple schemes such as pedestrian crossings and yellow lines where the dangers were obvious to everyone.  In other local authority areas, it was apparent that road safety schemes were being introduced, including 20mph schemes, without the problems that were being faced in Gloucestershire.

 

They believed that a change of attitude was required and officers should not just rely on official figures for accidents.  It was shocking that schemes were not being progressed because they were not supported by official statistics for people that were killed or seriously injured.  There were near misses every day, accidents were often not reported to the Police and insurance companies were prevented from releasing information due to GDPR regulations.

 

A member expressed disappointment that the Council had stopped providing support for road safety partnerships in each district.  They noted their value in bringing together community groups, road safety organisations, magistrates, the police and GCC staff.  They said that the Stroud Road  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56


Meeting: 26/06/2019 - County Council (Item 43)

Motions

The Council’s Constitution provides for a maximum of two hours for debate on motions.  At the end of the two hour period, those members who have already indicated their intention to speak on the motion being debated at that time will be allowed to speak, the mover of the motion will be asked to sum-up and the vote will be taken.

 

The time limit for member speeches is three minutes and the time limit for proposing a motion is five minutes.

 

The following motions were received by the closing date of 10am on 18 June 2019: 

 

Motion 839 – Every Child Matters

Proposed by Cllr Lesley Williams

Seconded by Cllr Brian Oosthuysen

 

This Council recognises that every child in Gloucestershire deserves the best education possible.

 

This Council recognises that the county has some schools that do give children  an education that equips them for the best possible start in life. However this Council  should also recognise that some schools do not meet the required standard to deliver a high quality  education.

 

Gloucestershire County Council continues to play an important part in the education of all young people in the County.

 

This Council also recognises that it is Central Government’s intention that all school should become academies or part of a multi academy trust.

 

I propose and request, therefore, that in preparation for any changes in status to schools in the County that there is a thorough study which would provide an analysis, district by district, of the attainment and achievement of students attending schools in the County. Ideally this study would be done as a peer review. 

 

Motion 840 – Terminally ill employees

Proposed by Cllr Kate Haigh

Seconded by Cllr Lesley Williams

 

This Council notes that terminally ill employees are not currently protected under national disability legislation and can therefore be dismissed if they are no longer able to conduct their role with reasonable adjustments. This can mean that terminally ill people can be subjected to stressful assessments, subsequent dismissal and the loss of death in service benefits – all following the diagnosis of a terminal illness. 

 

This Council believes that those receiving a terminal diagnosis are entitled to dignity at work.

 

This Council resolves to:

·      Review sick pay and sickness absence procedures, with specific reference to those with a terminal diagnosis.

·      Make a commitment not to dismiss a member of staff with a terminal illness, due to their condition.

·      Ensure that the Council has a competent programme with the capacity to provide support to any person with a terminal diagnosis.

·      Provide staff training on dealing with terminal illnesses

·      Ensure that Human Resources have procedures in place to make necessary adaptations to work arrangements for staff with a terminal illness.

·      Sign and adopt the TUC’s dying to work charter 

 

Motion 841 – Gloucestershire Youth Council

Proposed by Cllr Paul Hodgkinson

Seconded by Cllr Jeremy Hilton

 

This Council notes that:

·         There are nearly 40,000 young people, aged 11-18 in Gloucestershire, representing a significant proportion of the county’s population.

·         Youth councils  ...  view the full agenda text for item 43

Minutes:

Motion 839 – Every Child Matters

Having declared a disclosable pecuniary interest, Cllr Ben Evans left the chamber for this item.

 

The proposer Cllr Lesley Williams and seconder Cllr Brian Oosthuysen indicated that they wished to make an amendment to their motion (see the highlighted text).

 

This Council recognises that every child in Gloucestershire deserves the best education possible.

 

This Council recognises that the county has some schools that do give children  an education that equips them for the best possible start in life. However this Council  should also recognise that some schools do not meet the required standard to deliver a high quality  education.

 

Gloucestershire County Council continues to play an important part in the education of all young people in the County.

 

This Council also recognises that it is Central Government’s intention that all school should become academies or part of a multi academy trust.

 

That this Council call upon the Cabinet Member to provide a report to Council on the attainment and achievement of students living and educated in the County and providing an analysis by home district and division.  This report to form the basis of the County Council’s response to changing need for schools across the county. 

 

Cllr Williams stated that, although some schools were performing well, there were too many schools rated by Ofsted as poor or inadequate.  She referred to the scrutiny reviews of school exclusions and secondary school performance in the Forest of Dean which identified a number of serious concerns.  At the last Children and Families Scrutiny Committee, the Regional Schools Commissioner highlighted that Gloucestershire historically had a high rate of exclusions and the Council had taken a neutral position in terms of the action it had taken. 

 

Cllr Oosthuysen noted that local authorities had a long and proud history of involvement in schools.  He said that too many schools were in desperate need of support and guidance.  A detailed analysis of the attainment and achievement of students across the county was needed to assess the position properly.  He was anxious that the Council did whatever it could to ensure that every child in Gloucestershire got the best opportunity.

 

A member referred to the poor state of some school buildings and he feared that unless urgent action was taken some schools might be forced to close.

 

Cllr Patrick Molyneux, the Cabinet Member for Economy, Skills and Growth, recognised that a good education in the county was essential for a good start in life.  He proposed an amendment that the report be presented to the Children and Families Scrutiny Committee so that members could look at the issues in greater depth.  He said that he was aware of the difficulties suffered by some schools including a number of secondary schools in the Forest of Dean. 

 

In seconding the amendment, Cllr Mark Hawthorne, Leader of the Council, noted that Gloucestershire had been leading the F40 campaign for fairer funding for schools. He was concerned that despite extensive lobbying children in the county received  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43


Meeting: 15/05/2019 - County Council (Item 34)

Motions

The Council’s Constitution provides for a maximum of two hours for debate on motions.  At the end of the two hour period, those members who have already indicated their intention to speak on the motion being debated at that time will be allowed to speak, the mover of the motion will be asked to sum-up and the vote will be taken.

 

The following motions were received by the closing date of 7 May 2019. 

 

Motion 836 – Carbon action plan motion

Proposed by Cllr Iain Dobie

Seconded by Cllr Jeremy Hilton

 

This Council notes: 

  • That humans have already caused irreversible climate change, the impacts of which are being felt around the world. 
  • That global temperatures have already increased by 1 degree Celsius from pre-industrial levels and atmospheric CO2 far exceeds levels deemed to be safe for humanity. 
  • The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) special report on global warming of 1.5°C, published in January 2019, which tells us that limiting Global Warming to 1.5°C may still be possible with ambitious action from national and sub-national authorities, civil society, the private sector, indigenous peoples and local communities. 
  • That the world is on track to overshoot the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C limit before 2050. 
  • That the consequences of global temperature rising above 1.5°C are so severe that preventing this from happening must be humanity’s number one priority. 

 

This Council further notes that: 

  • Gloucestershire County Council recently appointed a Cabinet Member with specific responsibilities tied to climate change.
  • Gloucestershire County Council is on target to reduce corporate carbon emissions by 60% by 2020/21 against its 2006/07 baseline. 
  • Bold climate action can deliver economic benefits 
  • Councils around the world are responding by declaring a ‘Climate Emergency’ and committing resources to address this emergency. 

 

This Council resolves to: 

  • Commit towards an 80 per cent reduction in the Council’s corporate carbon emissions no later than 2030, striving towards 100 per cent with carbon offsetting by the same date. 
  • To call on Central Government to provide additional powers and resources to support local and national action towards this 2030 target. 
  • Lobby national government to commit to 100 per cent carbon neutrality by 2045. 
  • Consider its contracts going forward to oblige all contractors to report their carbon emissions and to place a ‘carbon/environmental cost’ on competing bids. 
  • Do all in its power to adopt, implement and strengthen the Gloucestershire Sustainable Energy Strategy. 
  • Ensure that our major plans, such as the local transport plan, have clearly identified strategies to reduce carbon emissions. 
  • Work with district and borough councils to reduce the districts’ carbon footprint within their corporate strategies. 
  • Provide an annual report to the Environment Committee, with a performance update on a quarterly basis. 

 

 

Motion 837 – Parental leave for councillors

Proposed by Cllr Mark Hawthorne

Seconded by Cllr Carole Allaway-Martin

 

This Council notes:

·         The under-representation of women at all levels of politics

·         Nationally only 4% of councils have a policy on parental leave for councillors.

·         That, whilst proper parental leave is important to all parents, it has been particularly  ...  view the full agenda text for item 34

Minutes:

Motion 836 – Carbon action plan motion

In proposing and seconding the motion, Cllr Iain Dobie and Cllr Jeremy Hilton accepted a friendly amendment from Cllr Rachel Smith (see highlighted text). 

 

This Council notes that:

·         Humans have already caused irreversible climate change, the impacts of which are being felt around the world.

·         Global temperatures have already increased by 1°C Celsius from pre-industrial levels and atmospheric CO2 far exceeds levels deemed to be safe for humanity.

·         The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) special report on global warming of 1.5°C, published in January 2019, which tells us that limiting Global Warming to 1.5°C may still be possible with ambitious action from national and sub-national authorities, civil society, the private sector, indigenous peoples and local communities.

·         The world is on track to overshoot the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C limit before 2050.

·         The consequences of global temperature rising above 1.5°C are so severe that preventing this from happening must be humanity’s number one priority.

 

This Council further notes that:

·         Gloucestershire County Council recently appointed a Cabinet Member with specific responsibilities tied to Climate change.

·         Gloucestershire County Council is on target to reduce corporate carbon emissions by 60% by 2020/21 against its 2006/07 baseline. 

·         Bold climate action can deliver economic benefits.

·         Councils around the world are responding by declaring a ‘Climate Emergency’ and committing resources to address this emergency.

·         The UK Parliament has recognised the climate emergency

·         The County Council has a leadership role, along with other public sector bodies, in reducing Carbon emissions across the whole county.

 

This Council resolves to:

·         Declare a climate emergency

  • Commit towards an 80 per cent reduction in the Council’s corporate emissions no later than 2030, striving towards 100 per cent with carbon offsetting by the same date. 
  • Call on Central Government to provide additional powers and resources to support local and national action towards this 2030 target.
  • Lobby the national government to commit to 100 per cent carbon neutrality by 2045.  
  • Consider its contracts going forward to oblige all contractors to report their carbon emissions and to place a ‘carbon / environmental cost’ on competing bids. 
  • Do all in its power to adopt, implement and strengthen the Gloucestershire Sustainable Energy Strategy. 
  • Ensure that our major plans, such as the local transport plan, have clearly identified strategies to reduce carbon emissions. 
  • Work with district and borough councils to reduce the districts’ carbon footprint within their corporate strategies. 
  • Provide an annual report to the environment committee, with a performance update on a quarterly basis. 

 

Cllr Dobie spoke passionately in support of the motion.  He stated that action needed to be taken now and urged that challenging and achievable targets be set to reduce carbon emissions.  He noted that average global temperatures had increased significantly and sea levels were rising.  The impact of doing nothing was obvious to everyone and an ambitious strategic approach was needed.  All of the Council’s existing aims and goals needed to be aligned with climate change ambitions.  Action could be taken in a range of areas  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34


Meeting: 27/03/2019 - County Council (Item 19)

Motions

The Council’s Constitution provides for a maximum of two hours for debate on motions.  At the end of the two hour period, those members who have already indicated their intention to speak on the motion being debated at that time will be allowed to speak, the mover of the motion will be asked to sum-up and the vote will be taken.

 

The time limit for member speeches is three minutes and the time limit for proposing a motion is five minutes.

 

The following motions were received by the closing date of 10am on 19 March 2019: 

 

Motion 830 – Statutory Youth Service

Proposed by Cllr Lesley Williams

Seconded by Cllr Steve Robinson

 

This Council notes:

·         Youth work is a distinct educational process offering young people safe spaces to explore their identity, experience decision-making, increase their confidence, develop inter-personal skills and think through the consequences of their actions. This leads to better informed choices, changes in activity and improved outcomes for young people.

 

·         Cuts to youth services have devastated the lives of young people by damaging community cohesion, making it harder to stay in formal education, and having a negative impact on their health and wellbeing. 83% of youth workers say the cuts have had an effect on crime and anti-social behaviour.

 

·         Youth work as a profession has been eroded and undermined through funding cuts and market reforms, and that overall spending on youth services in England has fallen by £737m (62%) since 2010. 

This Council believes:

·         Youth services should be made statutory, recognising the important role universal youth work plays in supporting young people to realise their potential.

 

·         There should be a mandated national body with dedicated ring-fenced funding to oversee youth service provision across England.

 

This Council therefore resolves to:

·         Write to the six Gloucestershire MPs to ask them to support and campaign for statutory youth services.

 

Motion 831 – Highways

Proposed by Cllr Vernon Smith

Seconded by Cllr Matt Babbage

 

Over the past year the Highways Department has delivered for and on behalf of all the members here a  huge milestone of nearly ¾ of a million m2 of resurfacing (103 Gloucester rugby pitches) or 100 km of new road surfacing, over a 100,000 tonnes of tarmac, or 5,000 lorry loads. A tremendous achievement in the £150m Highway investment programme.

 

Top schemes over £400,000 each that have been resurfaced include. There are 165 other schemes to be delivered this financial year.

 

A4173/A46 Stroud to Pitchcombe - Stage 1

£840,000

A429 Toddenham Jct to Aston Magna Jct

£680,000

A436 Severn Springs to Kilkenny

£596,000

A40 London Road Andoversford

£515,000

A417 St Oswalds Road Gloucester - East Bound Only

£498,000

A48 Heartland Hill to Walmore Hill Chaxhill - SCRIM 

£497,000

B4066 Berkeley Heath

£472,000

A4136 Nailbridge to Plump Hill

£462,000

A4173/A46 Stroud to Pitchcombe - Stage 2

£454,000

B4215 Malswick Mill, Newent

£444,000

B4634 Old Gloucester Rd Staverton (C82 Jct  to M5 Bridge)

£426,000

A417 Over Causeway Gloucester (Town Ham)

£407,000

 

The A road network has received a significant  ...  view the full agenda text for item 19

Minutes:

Motion 830 – Statutory Youth Service

 

Cllr Steve Robinson proposed and Cllr Lesley Williams seconded the following motion:

 

This Council notes:

·         Youth work is a distinct educational process offering young people safe spaces to explore their identity, experience decision-making, increase their confidence, develop inter-personal skills and think through the consequences of their actions. This leads to better informed choices, changes in activity and improved outcomes for young people.

·         Cuts to youth services have devastated the lives of young people by damaging community cohesion, making it harder to stay in formal education, and having a negative impact on their health and wellbeing. 83% of youth workers say the cuts have had an effect on crime and anti-social behaviour.

·         Youth work as a profession has been eroded and undermined through funding cuts and market reforms, and that overall spending on youth services in England has fallen by £737m (62%) since 2010.  

This Council believes:

·         Youth services should be made statutory, recognising the important role universal youth work plays in supporting young people to realise their potential.

·         There should be a mandated national body with dedicated ring-fenced funding to oversee youth service provision across England.

This Council therefore resolves to:

Write to the six Gloucestershire MPs to ask them to support and campaign for statutory youth services.

 

In proposing the motion, Cllr Robinson stated that young people were the country’s future and he believed that they had been badly let down as a result of the County Council downgrading its Youth Service to a targeted offering through Prospects.  He noted that Sadiq Khan, Mayor of London, was investing significant sums into youth services in the capital as a preventative measure to address concerns around violent crime, anti-social behaviour and wider mental health issues.  He recognised that there were lots of organisations across the county trying to do their bit but he said that there was no overall coordination which meant that some of the most vulnerable young people did not get the services they needed. 

 

Cllr Richard Boyles, the Cabinet Member for Children and Young People, highlighted the success of the services currently provided by the Council.  He said that there were 17 youth workers who worked with a range of organisations across the county to deliver targeted support.  The approach was tailored to meet the needs of different areas and individuals and involved project and activity based work, anti-social behaviour groups and one to one sessions.  He noted that 150 hours of detached work had been provided in the last quarter to address particular issues identified by the Police. He referred to a range of activities that were taking place in Stonehouse. 

 

Liberal Democrat Group members believed that young people were being forgotten and they spoke in support of the motion to provide a statutory youth service.  They noted that young people had felt the brunt of cuts to services since austerity measures were introduced.  The County Council had largely withdrawn its services and funding pressures on schools meant that they were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19


Meeting: 28/11/2018 - County Council (Item 73)

Motions

The Council’s Constitution provides for a maximum of two hours for debate on motions.  At the end of the two hour period, those members who have already indicated their intention to speak on the motion being debated at that time will be allowed to speak, the mover of the motion will be asked to sum-up and the vote will be taken.

 

The time limit for member speeches is three minutes and the time limit for proposing a motion is five minutes.

 

The following motions were received by the closing date of 10am on 20 November 2018: 

 

Motion 825 – Protecting Gloucestershire Hospitals’ walk-in-services

Proposed by Cllr Joe Harris

Seconded by Iain Dobie

 

This Council notes:

·         The value communities place upon the Accident and Emergency units in both Gloucester and Cheltenham

·         The enormous and varied contributions made by the seven minor injury units spread across Gloucestershire

·         The great value that communities across Gloucestershire place upon having hospital facilities close by

 

This Council further notes that all Walk in Centres, Urgent Care Centres, and Minor Injury Units will be rebranded as Urgent Treatment Centres by the end of 2019. 

 

This Council resolves to write to Gloucestershire Clinical Commissioning Group, to appeal in the strongest possible terms, that none of the services currently on offer to walk-in patients at any of the nine hospitals are removed, including that Cheltenham General Hospital must not be further downgraded to an Urgent Treatment Centre from an Accident and Emergency department.

 

Motion 826 – Crisis in Local Government funding

Proposed by Cllr Paul Hodgkinson

Seconded by Cllr Lesley Williams

 

This Council notes:

·         The unprecedented times that the country is facing and the job that local government is doing in providing local stability and leadership in these tumultuous times. 

·         The irreplaceable role that local councils play at the heart of communities, providing key public services that protect the most defenceless in society – children at risk, disabled adults and vulnerable older people – and the services we all rely on, like clean streets, libraries, and children’s centres.

·         That councils up and down the UK are at breaking point, with disproportionate reductions in local council funding in comparison to the rest of the public sector.

·         That councils had to spend an extra £800m last year to meet the demand on vital services to protect children and that, with an ageing population and growing demand, adult social care faces a funding gap of over £2 billion in the next financial year.

 

This Council further notes:

·         The £1.3bn cut to Councils’ Revenue Support Grant that is due in 2019/20.

·         That, according to a cross-party report by the Local Government Association, council services will face a funding gap of £3.9 billion in 2019/20, rising to £7.8 billion by 2024/25.

 

This Council therefore resolves towrite to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, expressing its dismay that the Government failed to sufficiently address the growing funding gaps with local councils in the Autumn Budget, and requesting that he urgently rectify this mistake in judgement.  ...  view the full agenda text for item 73

Minutes:

Motion 825 – Protecting Gloucestershire Hospitals’ walk-in-services

 

In presenting the motion on the agenda, Cllr Joe Harris recognised that the Gloucestershire Hospitals’ Trust had faced severe financial difficulties and he paid tribute to hard work and commitment of clinicians and all the support staff working in hospitals in Gloucestershire.  He said that they went well beyond what was expected of them.  He stated that the walk-in services at Accident and Emergency, Urgent Care Centres and Minor Injury Units were greatly valued at the nine hospitals where these services were offered. He noted that at a recent meeting of the Health and Care Scrutiny Committee, the Hospitals’ Trust had assured members that proposed changes to General Surgery would not impact in any way on the walk-in services provided across the county. 

 

Cllr Harris stated that he was particularly concerned at the reduction in radiography services in five hospitals.   He said that community hospitals like those in Cirencester and Moreton-in-Marsh were jewels in the crown and he believed that they should be helped to develop their services to meet the needs of local communities.  He appealed to the Clinical Commissioning Group and the Gloucestershire Hospitals’ Trust to protect walk-in services across the county. 

 

In seconding the motion, Cllr Iain Dobie referred to the downgrading of Accident of Emergency at Cheltenham General Hospital to Urgent Care.  He said that the proposal to remove General Surgery facilities at Cheltenham posed a further threat to emergency services.  He noted that this meant that if anyone at Cheltenham General Hospital required emergency surgery they would have to be transferred by ambulance to Gloucester Royal Hospital. 

 

Cllr Tim Harman, Cabinet Member for Public Health and Communities, acknowledged the efforts of hospital staff and he fully supported the motion.  He recognised the great value that the local community placed on Accident and Emergency facilities at Cheltenham General Hospital.  He called for a doctor-led Accident and Emergency Unit to be reinstated in Cheltenham without delay.

 

Other members indicated strong support for the motion.  They recognised the importance of Accident and Emergency facilities in Cheltenham not just for the town but for the eastern side of the county including the Cotswolds.  They also noted the important role of the community hospitals which particularly helped elderly residents in the more rural parts of the county to access a range of health services.  One member referred to the vital service provided to the local community by Tetbury Hospital.  He said that it was often forgotten as it was a charitable trust and not an NHS Trust.

 

Cllr Mark Hawthorne, Leader of the Council, said that he was pleased that members had been given an opportunity to express their views.  He proposed a motion without notice that the original motion together with the comments made by members be referred to the Health and Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee.  He stated that the Scrutiny Committee had statutory powers which allowed it to challenge the Clinical Commissioning Group and the Hospital’s Trust on their proposals.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 73


Meeting: 12/09/2018 - County Council (Item 59)

Motions

The Council’s Constitution provides for a maximum of two hours for debate on motions.  At the end of the two hour period, those members who have already indicated their intention to speak on the motion being debated at that time will be allowed to speak, the mover of the motion will be asked to sum-up and the vote will be taken.

 

The time limit for member speeches is three minutes and the time limit for proposing a motion is five minutes.

 

The following motions were received by the closing date of 10am on 4 September 2018: 

 

Motion 820 – Accessibility through the Shire Hall complex

Proposed by Cllr Lesley Williams

Seconded by Cllr Klara Sudbury

 

This Council notes that extensive work is being carried out throughout the Shire Hall complex to improve both the external facade of buildings and also internally.

 

This Council requests:

 

·         That a full audit is carried out to ensure that all buildings are all easily accessible to the highest standard, signs visible, easily read and in braille where needed, transparent panels in doors so a person in a wheel chair is visible, automatic doors are accessible to people in wheelchairs and every attempt is made to ensure that it is as easy for a person with a disability to move around the buildings as it is for someone who considers themselves able bodied.

·         That once the audit is complete, all necessary adjusts are made.

  • A fully accessible toilet, built to Changing Places standards (http://www.changing-places.org) is introduced in Shire Hall, which can be used by disabled people visiting Gloucester as well as Shire Hall.

 

 

Motion 821 - Call for a People’s vote on Brexit

Proposed by Paul Hodgkinson

Seconded by Jeremy Hilton

 

This Council notes:

·         The recent warnings from multinational businesses based in the south west, including Airbus and Honda, that exiting the EU customs union will be a catastrophe for trade and may lead them to relocate their manufacturing outside of the UK.

·         The number of Gloucestershire citizens working for businesses that rely on free movement of trade within the European Union.

·         That, according to the Government’s own figures, under all Brexit scenarios the UK will be considerably poorer. 

·         The additional negative impacts in terms of the UK’s international reputation, society and environment.

 

This Council therefore agrees that there should be a ‘People’s Vote’ on the final Brexit deal, which should include an option for the United Kingdom to remain a full member of the European Union.

 

 

Motion 822 - Diabetes

Proposed by Cllr Klara Sudbury

Seconded by Cllr Simon Wheeler

 

This Council notes that:

·         Approximately six per cent of the UK population is living with diabetes.  Of this number, people with type 1 diabetes only account for approximately 10 per cent. 

·         Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease which bears no relation to excess body weight, diet or physical inactivity.

·         Due to the low numbers of people with type 1 diabetes, combined with high profile warnings about diet and type 2 diabetes, these  ...  view the full agenda text for item 59

Minutes:

Motion 820 – Accessibility through the Shire Hall complex

Cllr Lesley Williams proposed and Cllr Klara Sudbury seconded the motion on the agenda.

 

In proposing the motion, Cllr Williams stated that with all the work going on at Shire Hall at present there was an opportunity to ensure that access to the building, display facilities and hearing loops met the latest requirements.  She suggested that people with disabilities who were not familiar with Shire Hall be taken around the building to allow them to identify any problem areas.

In seconding the motion, Cllr Sudbury stated that it was important that Shire Hall was accessible for all people, irrespective of their disabilities. She said that this included providing a toilet that met the Changing Places requirements. She explained that Changing Places toilets provided additional equipment such as adult sized changing benches, a hoist system and space for up to two carers. These toilets provided comfort and dignity for people with disabilities.

 

Cllr Ray Theodoulou, the Cabinet Member for Finance and Change, advised that all the work being undertaken at Shire Hall was compliant with the latest building regulations regarding accessibility.  He said that new lifts were being installed with protected power and intercom facilities, new doors, ramps, opening up offices to provide wider through routes, improving toilets to meet the requirements recognised by disabled groups and providing extra parking spaces for blue badge holders.    He stated that the Council was in ongoing dialogue with disability groups and an audit would be undertaken to identify where there were particular issues to address.

 

A number of members believed that the Council should take the lead in the county in providing Changing Places toilets.  They noted that the reality for people with disabilities was that they stayed at home or faced the indignity of being changed on the floor of a toilet.

 

A member referred to the lack of breast feeding facilities when babies were frequently brought to Shire Hall to register their birth.  Another member noted how difficult it was for disabled people to access certain parts of the building. 

 

A member noted the difficulties that poor vision brought in navigating a complex building like Shire Hall.  She thanked Democratic Services and ICT for the support they had provided.

 

Another member asked that access to Council buildings away from Shire Hall also be included as part of the review. He undertook to pursue this with officers outside the meeting.

On being put to the vote, the motion received unanimous support.

 

RESOLVED

That this Council notes that extensive work is being carried out throughout the Shire Hall complex to improve both the external facade of buildings and also internally.

 

That this Council requests:

·         That a full audit is carried out to ensure that all buildings are all easily accessible to the highest standard, signs visible, easily read and in braille where needed, transparent panels in doors so a person in a wheel chair is visible, automatic doors are accessible to people in wheelchairs and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59


Meeting: 27/06/2018 - County Council (Item 46)

Motions

The Council’s Constitution provides for a maximum of two hours for debate on motions.  At the end of the two hour period, those members who have already indicated their intention to speak on the motion being debated at that time will be allowed to speak, the mover of the motion will be asked to sum-up and the vote will be taken.

 

As part of the constitution changes approved at the full Council meeting on 14 February 2018, the time limit for member speeches has been reduced from five to three minutes and the time limit for proposing a motion has been reduced from 10 to five minutes.

 

The following motions were received by the closing date of 10am on 19 June 2018: 

 

Motion 814 – Celebrating the Windrush Generation

Proposed by Cllr Brian Oosthuysen

Seconded by Cllr Steve Robinson

 

This Council notes the extraordinary contribution that the Windrush generation have made to our country.

 

This Council further notes:

  • The recent apologies from the Prime Minister to the Windrush generation and the announcements and reassurances given by the Home Secretary Sajid Javid on assisting the Windrush generation.

 

  • That there is a clear difference between the Windrush generation and those who may be here illegally.

 

  • The need for robust Government policy with regard to illegal immigration.

 

This Council therefore resolves to:

  • Fly the Jamaican Flag at Shire Hall on 5th August for Jamaican Independence Day.

 

  • Support Gloucester City Council with their Windrush celebrations throughout this year.

 

  • Write to the Home Secretary to ask that he ensures that the Government act swiftly as promised to ensure that Windrush victims are granted their rights, and are fully compensated for any financial hardship that they may have suffered.

 

 

Motion 815 – Cycling safety

Proposed by Cllr Iain Dobie

Seconded by Cllr Lesley Williams

 

This Council notes the outstanding cycling routes which Gloucestershire enjoys, both within its towns and city and the rural countryside.   This Council further notes the benefits of cycling, in terms of individual health and air quality as well as bringing tourists into the area.

 

However, this Council also recognises that cycling in Gloucestershire can be dangerous, with cars often passing too close to cyclists, increasing the chances of a collision.  This undermines the good work taking place across parts of the county to encourage cycling and dissuades many people from opting to use a bicycle rather than a car.

 

This Council recognises the work carried out by Gloucestershire Constabulary last July with Operation Close Pass, which aimed to inform car drivers about safe distances for overtaking cyclists.  However it is disappointed by the limitations of the operation, running for just two hours on one day and pulling over just five drivers. 

 

We therefore call on the Leader of Council to write to the Chief Constable of Gloucestershire Constabulary, to congratulate the police on the work done to date but also to encourage them to roll Operation Close Pass out across the county in order to educate significantly more drivers about  ...  view the full agenda text for item 46

Minutes:

Motion 814 – Celebrating the Windrush Generation

Cllr Brian Oosthuysen proposed and Cllr Steve Robinson seconded the motion included on the agenda on which  friendly amendment from the Conservatives had been accepted.

 

Cllr Oosthuysen talked of his own experience of coming to this country from South Africa, and the situations he had witnessed there, how he had come to a country where he had thought that there was justice and liberty. He emphasised that the Windrush generation had come to England at the invitation of the British government and he was appalled at the treatment of this generation and their families, including some having been placed in detention centres. He felt we should instead be celebrating the contribution made by the Windrush generation to British society and apologising to them for the treatment that they have received.

 

Cllr Steve Robinson, seconder of the motion, indicated that he was reserving his right to speak to the motion until the end of the debate.

 

Cllr Joe Harris indicated that the Liberal Democrat Group wanted to move an amendment to the motion. The amendment was to delete the third bullet point which referred to ‘the need for robust Government policy with regard to illegal immigration’. Cllr Harris proposed and Cllr Jeremy Hilton seconded the amendment.

 

Cllr Harris stated that the Windrush scandal has stained the reputation of this country. People were being treated as though they were worthless because of their place of origin and because they were not able to prove who they were, and some people were being deported to places that they had never seen. He questioned what this said about the current level of political discourse. He stated that in his view the government must have been relying on the British public not caring but the public had been clear that this was not so.

 

Cllr Hilton reiterated Cllr Harris’s points and stated that the system needed to be fair and efficient; but the term robust was not acceptable.

 

Cllr Brian Oosthuysen, proposer of the motion, informed the meeting that he accepted this as a ‘friendly’ amendment. The Leader of the council informed the meeting that the Conservative group did not accept this amendment.

 

In response to challenges relating to whether this amendment constituted a friendly motion, or not, and should be debated as an amendment, or  as part of the original motion, the Chairman decided to adjourn the meeting, for five minutes, in order to receive constitutional advice from the Monitoring Officer and Head of Legal Services.

 

On resuming the meeting (at 10:55am) the Chairman informed the meeting that for pragmatic reasons the amendment would be debated.

 

The main points from the debate were:-

·         That the motion was meant to be about celebrating the WIndrush generation and that this statement detracted from that purpose

·         The word ‘robust’ was not acceptable and was not defined within the context of the motion

·         If the council wished to debate illegal immigration then a motion could be submitted

·         The Windrush generation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 46


Meeting: 16/05/2018 - County Council (Item 34)

Motions

The Council’s Constitution provides for a maximum of two hours for debate on motions.  At the end of the two hour period, those members who have already indicated their intention to speak on the motion being debated at that time will be allowed to speak, the mover of the motion will be asked to sum-up and the vote will be taken.

 

As part of the constitution changes approved at the full Council meeting on 14 February 2018, the time limit for member speeches has been reduced from five to three minutes and the time limit for proposing a motion has been reduced from 10 to five minutes.

 

The following motions were received by the closing date of 9 May 2018: 

 

Motion 809 – Gloucestershire roads

Proposed by Cllr Joe Harris

Seconded by Cllr Iain Dobie

 

This Council notes the huge challenge facing our authority in fixing the massive backlog of potholes across Gloucestershire.

 

This Council welcomes all investment into Gloucestershire’s roads after all parties locally pledged to invest more into the County’s roads at the last election.

 

The Council recognises, however, that it won’t be nearly enough to fix Gloucestershire’s broken roads network, the cost of which is estimated to be £80 million.

 

The Council further notes that the treasury makes over £30 billion every year through Vehicle Excise Duty (Road Tax) and Fuel Duty but only about £10bn of this is reinvested back in to roads across the UK.

 

We therefore call on the Government to increase the amount it spends on roads maintained by councils across the UK and to ensure that a greater proportion of road tax is actually spent on roads. We also instruct the Leader of Council to write to the Secretary of State for Transport and the County’s six MPs outlining this Council’s position.

 

 

Motion 810 – Gambling-related harm

Proposed by Cllr Kate Haigh

Seconded by Cllr Jeremy Hilton

 

This Council notes that:

·         Gambling is a legitimate leisure activity enjoyed by many, and that the majority who gamble do so with enjoyment and without exhibiting problematic behaviour.

·         It is estimated there are around 373,000 problem gamblers in England and 1.7 million individuals classified as being at-risk of problem gambling.

·         For problem-gamblers, harm can include higher levels of physical and mental illness, debt problems, relationship and family breakdown, substance misuse and criminality.

·         The cost of problem gamblers to the public purse was between £250 million and £1.2 billion per year.

This Council further notes that:

·         ‘Protecting the most vulnerable people in our county’ is one of the priorities set out in our Council Strategy.

·         The Gambling Commission briefing paper on ‘Gambling-related harm as a public health issue’ published February 2018 states, ‘whilst public health is not listed as a responsible authority under the [Gambling] Act [2005], [the Gambling Commission] consider that they have an important strategic role in informing the way that licensing authorities carry out their gambling responsibilities’

·         Local Authorities with licensing responsibilities are required to publish a Statement of Principles as part of  ...  view the full agenda text for item 34

Minutes:

Motion 809 – Gloucestershire roads

Cllr Joe Harris proposed and Cllr Iain Dobie seconded the motion included on the agenda.

 

Cllr Harris said that the state of the county’s roads were shameful with Cycling UK identifying Gloucestershire as having some of the worst condition roads in the country.  Many drivers were suffering financial loss through the damage caused by potholes.  The position was even more serious for cyclists and motorcyclists who could be seriously injured or even killed if they hit a pothole or swerved to avoid one.  He believed that the safety of road users should be the number one priority for the Government.  He stated that close to £40 billion was raised through vehicle excise duty and fuel duty but only £10 billion was reinvested in the highway network.  He called upon the Government to allocate more money for the maintenance of the road network.

 

Cllr Dobie advised that the poor condition of the roads had been the number one issue raised by residents during the recent Cheltenham BC election campaign. He said that the state of the roads was a national disgrace and the reason why they were in such poor condition was that not enough money was being spent on maintaining them.  A recent report indicated that the condition of roads in the UK were worse than Chile, Cyprus and Oman.

 

Cllr Vernon Smith proposed and Cllr Mark Hawthorne seconded the following amendment (see the deleted words and the new text highlighted):

 

This Council notes the huge challenge facing our authority in fixing the massive backlog of potholes across Gloucestershire.

This Council notes the huge challenge facing our authority in fixing the £120 million highways backlog across Gloucestershire inherited by the Conservative administration in 2005.

 

This Council welcomes all investment into Gloucestershire’s roads after all parties locally pledged to invest more into the County’s roads at the last election.

This Council’s strategy since inheriting this backlog has significantly reduced the £120 million to an estimated £80 million. It therefore welcomes all investment into Gloucestershire’s roads including the Conservative election pledge of a further £150 million over the next 5 years.

 

The Council recognises, however, that it won’t be nearly enough to fix Gloucestershire’s broken roads network, the cost of which is estimated to be £80 million.

We further note that since 2009 Gloucestershire has benefited from £222 million of Department of Transport capital funding and nearly £50 million of major structures funding.

 

The Council further notes that the treasury makes over £30 billion every year through Vehicle Excise Duty (Road Tax) and Fuel Duty but only about £10bn of this is reinvested back in to roads across the UK.

It notes however that national roads receive 52 times more funding from Government than councils’ local roads. It further notes the Local Government Association’s (LGA) call on the Government to deliver a new strategy to provide a fully-funded plan for the growing number of vehicles on the nation’s road by reinvesting 2% per litre of existing fuel  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34


Meeting: 07/12/2016 - County Council (Item 77)

Motions

For debate and decision.

 

The following motions had been received by the closing date at 10am on Tuesday, 29 November 2016.

 

Motion 782 - Community Support Payments (Fracking) in Gloucestershire

Proposed by Cllr Barry Kirby

Seconded by Cllr Graham Morgan

 

This Council notes that the Government have recently changed their ‘fracking’ policy to include a personal payment to households within the area of proposed ‘fracking’ sites.

 

This Council believes that this is fundamentally wrong, as it could lead to critical environmental decisions being taken away from communities as a whole. This Council reaffirms that the protection of Gloucestershire’s environment is a key priority for this Authority.

 

This Council also notes its disappointment in the Government for abolishing the Department for Energy and Climate Change.

 

This Council asks that the Leader of the Council writes to Gloucestershire’s six MPs and the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy to urge them to re-evaluate Government policy over the proposed Community Support Payments for fracking.

 

Motion 783 – Open Contracting

Proposed by Cllr Sarah Lunnon

Seconded by Cllr Mike Sztymiak

 

That Gloucestershire County Council commits to the Open Contracting Global Principles and takes action to ensure that:

- By the end of 2017 complete information for all contracting processes over £1m, including details of the tender, award and contract process, the full text of contracts and amendments, and performance information, are proactively published;
- By the end of 2018 complete information is available for all contracting processes, over £500*, is proactively published

The presumption should be that the text of all contracts is open by default. Redactions should only be permitted: (a) at the explicit written request of the parties to the contract; (b) subject to the public interest tests of the Freedom of Information act; (c) with the minimum possible redactions; and (d) with full justifications for any redaction given.

Furthermore, to ensure public access to information on the operation of outsourced services, all future contracts of the Council should include a model clause providing full public access to performance reporting and other key information required to exercise effective scrutiny.

(*This should be set the same as the threshold in the local government transparency code)

Notes:
The Open Contracting Global Principles were developed through an extensive consultation process involving governments, private sector and civil society. The UK Government has endorsed the principles in it's 2013-15 and 2016-18 Open Government Partnership National Action Plans.

The Council is required by the provision of the Local Government Transparency Code to disclose a log of all contracts entered into. This motion builds upon that practice, adding a requirement for enhanced disclosure of contract text, performance information and information about the whole contracting process.

This motion is proposed on a basic understanding of fairness, that those paying the bill be allowed to see the itemised invoices, to understand exactly what they are buying. In terms of public interest it will also enable full scrutiny of how and what public money is being spent on and  ...  view the full agenda text for item 77

Minutes:

Motion 782 - Community Support Payments (Fracking) in Gloucestershire

Cllr Barry Kirby and Cllr Graham Morgan, the proposer and seconder of the motion, accepted the changes highlighted below:

 

This Council notes that the Government have recently proposed a change to their ‘fracking’ policy to include a personal payment to households within the area of proposed ‘fracking’ sites.

 

This Council believes that this is fundamentally wrong, as it could lead to critical environmental decisions being taken away from communities as a whole. This Council reaffirms that the protection of Gloucestershire’s environment is a key priority for this authority.

 

This Council notes its disappointment in the Government for abolishing the Department for Energy and Climate Change. This Council also notes its disappointment that that previous recommendations made by Environment and Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee have not been supported by the administration. Therefore this Council requests that the Cabinet Member for Fire, Planning and Infrastructure establishes a cross party advisory group to consider those aspects of the Local Minerals Plan that relate to ‘Fracking’. This would allow members to represent the concerns of local communities.

 

This Council asks that the Leader of the Council writes to Gloucestershire’s six MPs and the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy to urge them to re-evaluate Government policy over the proposed Community Support Payment for fracking.

 

This Council affirms its opposition in principle alone to any attempt to Frack in the Forest of Dean and other parts of the county.

 

In proposing the motion, Cllr Kirby noted that although the licence for the Forest of Dean had been returned by the applicant, there could be other applications for licences in the Forest of Dean and other parts of the county.  He stated that by offering community support payments the Prime Minister had in effect said that she did not trust Local Government to look after local communities.  With the current economic difficulties local people might be tempted to take the money to make ends meet. He was concerned at the disastrous impact on the environment when fracking went wrong as demonstrated by incidents in the USA.

 

In seconding the motion, Cllr Morgan believed that fracking was fundamentally wrong with operations in one area potentially having an effect much further afield.  He referred to drilling in Preston, Lancashire resulting in seismic activity much further south in the country with an epicentre near Birmingham and tremors being felt in Gloucestershire.  He also expressed concern at the potential impact on water supplies in areas where fracking was taking place.

 

Cllr Nigel Moor, the Cabinet Member for Fire, Planning and Infrastructure, stated that there were no licences in Gloucestershire and the geology of the county meant that the chances of fracking were very slim.  He believed that the motion was premature and he was concerned that speculating was causing unnecessary alarm amongst residents.

 

A member expressed concern at the potential safety aspects of fracking.  He said that the Government was in effect ‘bribing’ people with payments.  He  ...  view the full minutes text for item 77


Meeting: 14/09/2016 - County Council (Item 62)

Motions

For debate and decision.

 

The following motions had been received by the closing date at 10am on Tuesday, 6 September 2016.

 

Motion 776 – Waste recycling rates

Proposed by Cllr Paul Hodgkinson

Seconded by Cllr Klara Sudbury

 

This Council notes the increase in overall waste volumes.

 

This Council also notes that the overall county-wide recycling rate has for the last five years been well below the 53% target.

 

This Council would like to encourage a reduction in Gloucestershire’s waste volumes and an increase in its recycling rates.

 

This Council therefore requests that the Cabinet Member commissions a report through existing resources to look at ways in which the county’s recycling rates can be improved. Focusing on reducing, reusing and recycling this report is to be scrutinised at November’s Environment and Community Scrutiny Committee before coming back to Council in December.   

 

Motion 777  – Meals on Wheels

Proposed by Cllr David Brown 

Seconded by Cllr Suzanne Williams

 

This Council recognises the delivery of community meals to the homes of around 650 eligible older and vulnerable people is a vital service in Gloucestershire.

 

This Council notes that the current community meals service contract with apetito has been in place to deliver ‘Meals on Wheels’ from 1 April 2016.

 

This Council also notes that apetito received 35 complaints in the first three weeks nearly all due to missed or late deliveries.

 

This Council is aware that with all new contracts there is a settling-in period, but after six months of delivery, this Council is disappointed that members are still hearing of complaints including food not arriving at all, food being delivered very early or late, wrong choices being delivered and drivers not knowing where clients live.

 

This Council therefore requests the Cabinet Member to work with apetito in adopting a more robust monitoring process, which includes the implementation of performance targets and for this data to be closely monitored by the Health and Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee through the publication of quarterly reports. 

 

Motion 778 – Hate Crime

Proposed by Cllr Klara Sudbury

Seconded by Cllr Chris Coleman

 

This Council is concerned by the reported rise in hate crime across the country following the EU referendum.

 

The Council therefore re-affirms its commitment to an inclusive, tolerant and diverse county. We welcome the many contributions made to our vibrant multicultural and multiracial community by people regardless of their background. We will continue to work to tackle hate crime and discrimination in all its forms.

 

This Council also calls on the Government to guarantee to all EU nationals living in Gloucestershire that they have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely regardless of the outcome of the EU referendum and any subsequent Brexit negotiations. 

 

Motion 780 – Accident and Emergency waiting times

Proposed by Cllr Tim Harman

Seconded by TBA

 

This Council notes the recent decision by NHS Improvement to find Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Trust in breach of its licence, as a result of a consistent failure to meet Accident and Emergency waiting  ...  view the full agenda text for item 62

Minutes:

Motion 776 – Waste recycling rates

Cllr Paul Hodgkinson and Cllr Klara Sudbury, the proposer and seconder of the original motion, accepted the changes highlighted below:

 

This Council notes the increase in overall waste volumes. 

 

This Council also notes that the overall county-wide recycling rate has for the last five years been well below the 53% target.

 

This Council would like to encourage a reduction in Gloucestershire’s waste volumes and an increase in its recycling rates.

 

This Council therefore directs the Cabinet Member to request a report from the Joint Waste Committee to look at ways in which the county’s recycling rates can be improved. Focusing on reducing, reusing and recycling this report is to be scrutinised at November’s Environment and Community Scrutiny Committee before coming back to Council in December 2016.  

 

This Council notes that recycling is the legal responsibility of district councils and agrees to continue working with them, in partnership, through the Joint Waste Committee to promote recycling and reduce waste.

 

In moving the motion, Cllr Hodgkinson stated that the county was falling behind its target for recycling with a current rate of 47% against a target of 60%.  This meant 531kg per household was going to landfill each year against a target of 457kg.  He noted that the performance by district varied dramatically with Gloucester recycling only 37% of waste.  He believed that the County Council should be taking a lead in working with the district councils to encourage more reuse and recycling.

 

In seconding the motion, Cllr Sudbury stated that the County Council had a duty to do all that it could to recycle more waste.  She said that she was concerned that the incinerator would mean that the Council would neglect its duty to reuse materials and fail to meet recycling targets.  She was anxious that the County Council worked proactively with the district councils to improve rates of reuse and recycling.

 

A member referred to an Italian Province that was reusing and recycling 82% of its waste and she said that this was just one of many examples across Europe.  She noted that if the same rate of reuse and recycling was achieved in Gloucestershire there would be a huge reduction in residual waste.  She believed that there was scope to do so much more in the county. 

 

Cllr Ray Theodoulou, the Cabinet Member who’s Finance and Change Portfolio included waste, stated that the County Council was already working closely with the district councils to improve rates of reuse and recycling.  He noted that cash payments had been made to the districts for some time to incentivise them to recycle more waste.  Elected members and professional officers had been brought  together under the Joint Waste Committee to take forward a range of initiatives.  The recycling rate was expected to reach 56% in 2016-17 with the rates in each district ranging from 31% in Stroud to 60% in Cotswold.  All of the districts had increased their recycling rate in 2015-16 with the exception of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62


Meeting: 29/06/2016 - County Council (Item 50)

Motions

For debate and decision.

 

The following motions had been received by the closing date at 10am on Tuesday, 21 June 2016.

 

Motion 772 – Highways satisfaction levels

Proposed by Cllr Paul Hodgkinson

Seconded by Cllr Chris Coleman

 

This Council expresses concern that the key performance indicators for Highways as published in recent Council papers show disappointing satisfaction levels with the service amongst both members and parish councils.

This Council believes that more needs to be done to improve satisfaction levels and that it is in the public interest to understand the reasons for such unsatisfactory levels of satisfaction.  

This Council therefore requests that the Environment and Community Scrutiny Committee conducts a detailed analysis of these satisfaction levels with the county’s highways and reports back for member discussion at the full Council meeting on 7 December 2016.  

 

Motion 773 – Children’s Centres

Proposed by Cllr Lesley Williams

Seconded by Cllr Brian Oosthuysen

 

This Council believes that the County’s Children’s Centres are an essential service which provides security, training and support to all families in Gloucestershire.

This Council believes that recent changes to the service leave it vulnerable to future closures.

This Council also raises concern that leaving some Children’s Centres ‘outside’ of local authority control will create a ‘two-tier’ system of service, which could serve to increase inequality in the County.

This Council asks that the Cabinet Member for Children and Families provides a report updating Council regarding the transition of these services to the new model before the end of March 2017. Following this, Council requests that the Cabinet member updates Councillors, on a twice yearly basis, on how this new service is performing, in order to ensure that the quality and consistency of the service is being maintained.

This Council also looks to the Cabinet Member and Leader of the Council for reassurance that the authority will take appropriate actions to ensure the anticipated outcomes of the new arrangements are delivered, and the confidence of the community in the Local Authority is maintained.

 

Motion 774 - Students and mental health

Proposed by Cllr Joe Harris

Seconded by Cllr Nigel Robbins

 

This Council notes the findings from the survey carried out by the Association of Colleges (AoC) in response to concerns about the increasing number of students with mental health difficulties in further education colleges.

This Council is concerned that there has been an increase in mental health problems amongst students in the county’s 26 school sixth forms, four further education colleges and two universities. 

This Council commends the range of support that is already being provided by the Council to sixth forms, colleges and universities, but wants to explicitly identify what joined-up approaches are being taken in the county to tackle and monitor the perceived increase in mental health problems amongst specifically students in Gloucestershire. 

This Council therefore resolves to create a cross-party student mental health task group that will invite evidence from school sixth forms, further education colleges, local universities, the Gloucestershire Suicide Prevention Partnership Forum  ...  view the full agenda text for item 50

Minutes:

Motion 772 – Highways satisfaction levels

In moving the motion detailed on the agenda, Cllr Paul Hodgkinson expressed serious concern that the performance indicators continued to show low levels of satisfaction with the Highways Service.  He said that time and again concerns had been raised but there were little signs of improvement.  He stated that communication from the Council’s highways contractor remained poor and they were failing to meet promises to address particular issues. 

 

In seconding the motion, Cllr Chris Coleman echoed the concerns raised by Cllr Hodgkinson.  He said that the Highways Service was remote and difficult to engage with.  He suggested that it might be time to return control to those that understood the needs of their local communities.  He questioned how data was collected, what difference it was making and how the collection and the analysis of the data could be strengthened to improve the service provided?

 

A member paid tribute to the work undertaken by the Area Highways Manager in his division but he expressed concern that not enough funds were available to allow schemes to be pursued.  He also referred to particular difficulties in his division with tree maintenance and traffic regulation orders.  He noted that a review of the highways contract was planned and there was an opportunity for the Cabinet Member to work with scrutiny in undertaking this work. 

 

Another member believed that road condition was deteriorating dramatically and councillors and the public had lost confidence in the service provided.

 

Cllr Vernon Smith, the Cabinet Member for Highways and Flood, advised that a document had just been published providing an analysis of complaints and the steps that were being to address problem areas.  He noted that the highways contractor had engaged the services of a retired Council officer to work with members to understand their particular concerns.  He said that the performance indicators for the condition of roads had improved significantly.  Unclassified roads were a particular challenge but their condition was now improving.  He accepted that more needed to be done but he believed that the Council was moving in the right direction.

 

Cllr Stan Waddington, the Chairman of the Highways Advisory Group, recognised that there had been difficulties but he said that steps were being taken by the highways contractor to address concerns.  Communication channels were much improved with a dedicated email for county councillors.  An online system was due to be launched in the Autumn that would provide real time information on highway activities in each area.  This information would not only be available to county councillors but also to others including parish and town councils.  Relationships  with parish and town councils were good in some areas but poor in others.

 

A member said that independently verified information showed that the condition of roads in the county was improving.  The backlog in maintenance had been reduced significantly.  He stated that national lobbying had resulted in new funding from the Government for highway maintenance.  Additional funding had been provided locally for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50


Meeting: 11/05/2016 - County Council (Item 36)

Motions

The following motions had been received by the closing date at 10am on Tuesday, 3 May 2016.

 

Motion 768 – Compulsory Academies

Proposed by Cllr Nigel Robbins

Seconded by Cllr Brian Oosthuysen

 

This Council commends the excellent relationship between the council and schools, all focused on delivering the best education possible so that each of Gloucestershire’s young people can attain their full potential.

 

This Council is aware that in spite of many secondary schools in the county that have now become academies, a relatively large number of primary schools in Gloucestershire have chosen to remain under local authority control.

 

This Council is concerned however with the Conservative Government’s recently published education white paper “Educational Excellence Everywhere” to convert schools to academies. Other issues include the loss of input from parents as governors or volunteers.

 

This Council recognises the importance and the valuable contributions of parent governors and local authority governors who act as “critical friends” to both support and hold head teachers to account.

 

This Council believes that making schools become academies is both illiberal and undemocratic, and this Council therefore resolves that the Leader of this Council and the Chief Executive write to the Secretary of State for Education, the Rt Hon Nicky Morgan MP and the six Gloucestershire MPs asking them to think again before converting all schools to academies and removing parents from their governing bodies.

 

Motion 769 – Registration Service

Proposed by Cllr Graham Morgan

Seconded by Cllr Tracy Millard

 

This Council notes that the issuing of death certificates across the County has faced serious delays in recent months, meaning that many families are waiting beyond the statutory five day period to receive death certificates.

 

This Council notes that many families are being asked to travel much further than should be expected to register deaths. 

This Council notes that the public have expressed dissatisfaction with the quality of this service.  

This Council asks that the Cabinet Member responsible for Registration Services presents a report, outlining (a) why the service is facing these challengers, and (b) what the administration’s proposals are to improve the quality of this service, to the Environment and Community Scrutiny Committee in July 2016.

Motion 770 – Consultation review

Proposed by Cllr Barry Kirby

Seconded by Cllr Lesley Williams

 

This Council recognises that consultations are a vital tool in order to gauge public opinion, and subsequently shape policy development. 

This Council notes that whilst consultations are taken seriously by the County Council often response rates are low.

This Council notes that its consultation protocol will be reviewed during the Summer 2016 and resolves to create a cross-party task group to help shape the County Council’s consultation policies and practices. Any recommendations will be presented to the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee.

 

Minutes:

Motion 768 – Compulsory Academies

In moving the motion on the agenda, Cllr Nigel Robbins stated that there was no evidence that academies were more effective than community schools.  He referred to some of the difficulties that academies had experienced across the country.  He questioned the value of multi-academy trusts run by a small number of paid board members.  Difficulties were being encountered in managing assets and finance and often there was a failure to respond to the needs of local communities.   He noted that the pace of academy take-up was slower than the Government wanted.  If academies were the answer to improving performance, he asked why had so many schools decided not to become academies.  He said that schools were not businesses and he believed that the Government needed to get away from the ideology that ‘business was always best’.

 

In seconding the motion, Cllr Brian Oosthuysen noted that there were now 39 trusts with more than 10 school academies.  He said that creating more trusts would simply increase the variation in school performance across the country.  He believed that schools should remain part of the local authority family and be run by the head teacher supported by a  governing body that included parents.  Parents brought valuable expertise from their working lives and added a great deal of value to the running of schools.  He stated that academies undermined local democracy and accountability and had a poor understanding of local communities.  

 

The following amendment proposed by Cllr Paul Hodgkinson and seconded by Cllr Iain Dobie was accepted by the mover and seconder of the original motion.  The amendment therefore became the substantive motion.

 

This Council commends the excellent relationship between the Council and schools, focused on delivering the best education possible so that each of Gloucestershire’s young people can attain their full potential.


This Council is aware that in spite of many secondary schools in the county that have now become academies, a relatively large number of primary schools in Gloucestershire have chosen to remain under local authority control.

This Council is concerned that despite the government abandoning its plans to force all schools in England to become academies, it will nevertheless still compel academy conversions on those schools that are deemed to be struggling or failing to improve sufficiently.

 

This Council recognises that there is a particular issue with the academisation of small rural schools, both in terms of the financial commitment involved and also the resource demands on the process on staff.


This Council still continues to recognise the importance and the valuable contributions of parent governors and local authority governors who act as ‘critical friends’ to both support and hold head teachers to account.

This Council believes that making schools become academies whether they’re struggling or not is both illiberal and undemocratic, and this Council therefore resolves that the Leader of this Council and the Chief Executive write to the Secretary of State for Education, the Rt Hon Nicky Morgan MP and the six Gloucestershire MPs  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36